Respiratory Pattern Changes in Sleep in Children on Vagal Nerve Stimulation for Refractory Epilepsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An altered breathing pattern in sleep, over two to three weeks, reported by the parents of a child on Vagal Nerve Stimulation (VNS) therapy for refractory epilepsy, prompted a sleep study in him. His polysomnography (PSG) revealed respiratory irregularity concordant with VNS activation. Dyspnoea is a well recognised and reported side effect of the VNS. However there are only a few studies looking at respiration in sleep with VNS. We therefore undertook PSGs in seven other children on VNS. METHODS: Sleep studies were undertaken, in accordance with standard clinical practice. Sleep and apnoeas and hypopneas were scored in accordance with conventional criteria. Respiratory pattern changes in sleep (RPCS) with VNS were looked for. RESULTS: Respiratory pattern changes in sleep were seen during PSG in seven of eight children on VNS for refractory epilepsy. Decreased effort and tidal volume occurred in seven children, concordant with VNS activation. In one child, this was associated with a fall in respiratory rate, i the other six children with an increase. No study showed an apnoea/hypopnoea index in the abnormal range. The RPCS were not associated with significant hypoxia or hypercapnoea. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that RPCS occur in most children with VNS. This is not surprising in view of the significant influence vagal afferents have on respiratory control centres. The RPCS did not appear to have a clinical impact in our group. However further investigations are suggested to explore this phenomenon, especially in patients with sleep apnoea syndromes or compromised respiratory function.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".